PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
1.52 - 1.58
1.19 - 3.37
354.5K / 984.1K (Avg.)
-1.64 | -0.94
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
19.27%
Revenue growth under 50% of CSIQ's 85.08%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
12.71%
Gross profit growth under 50% of CSIQ's 105.12%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-233.84%
Negative EBIT growth while CSIQ is at 672.10%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-90.19%
Negative operating income growth while CSIQ is at 648.42%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-91.84%
Negative net income growth while CSIQ stands at 933.05%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-89.47%
Negative EPS growth while CSIQ is at 872.73%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-89.47%
Negative diluted EPS growth while CSIQ is at 854.55%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.33%
Share reduction more than 1.5x CSIQ's 8.69%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.33%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x CSIQ's 9.86%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
48.66%
OCF growth of 48.66% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can expand into a larger competitive lead.
41.15%
FCF growth of 41.15% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest improvements in free cash can accelerate further.
-52.25%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while CSIQ stands at 312.17%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
2.11%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of CSIQ's 178.32%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-21.57%
Negative 3Y CAGR while CSIQ stands at 91.09%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
14.74%
OCF/share CAGR of 14.74% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
72.34%
OCF/share CAGR of 72.34% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
43.59%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 43.59% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
48.93%
Below 50% of CSIQ's 281.29%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
46.04%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of CSIQ's 62.26%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
-142.56%
Negative 3Y CAGR while CSIQ is 1.65%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
-75.77%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while CSIQ stands at 157.20%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-55.61%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while CSIQ is at 60.70%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
313.59%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x CSIQ's 19.65%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
15.84%
AR growth well above CSIQ's 15.27%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-9.40%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-2.18%
Negative asset growth while CSIQ invests at 0.09%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
16.14%
Positive BV/share change while CSIQ is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
1.70%
Debt growth far above CSIQ's 0.31%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
47.80%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. CSIQ's 35.92%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
20.84%
SG&A declining or stable vs. CSIQ's 43.27%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.